Sen. Jeff Sessions rebuts argument that Muslim immigration is a civil right

Of all the things candidate Donald Trump has said since announcing his bid for the White House, the one that has truly caught fire with the public, the press, and politicians was his suggestion that there be a temporary ban on Muslim immigration until the federal government can figure out how to properly vet immigrants.

Conservative Review reports today that discussion of a nuclear security bill was hijacked in a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting by Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), who insisted on a “Right to Migrate” amendment that would bar the United States from banning an potential immigrant based on religion.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) then delivered a rebuttal to Leahy that Conservative Review called “the mature conversation on immigration the rest of the ‘conservative’ establishment is unwilling to have,” adding that Sessions “not only destroyed his entire premise and false sense of morality, but expressed a set of important principles regarding the philosophical and moral underpinnings of a just and ideal immigration policy.”

“Fundamentally,” Sessions declared, “foreign nationals living in foreign countries have no constitutional right to enter the United States. If they did, any alien denied entry could file suit to demand entry and claim damages for lost employment, lost welfare benefits, lost income.”

“Choosing who can immigrate into the United States is, by definition, an exclusionary process,” Sessions added. “The goal is to select immigrants for admission based on the benefits they provide to society based on skills, ages, values, philosophy, incomes, etc. Our goal is to choose for admission those likeliest to succeed and flourish and, crucially, to support our Constitutional system of government and our values of pluralism and Republican governance.”

@ImmigrationGOP Alright I'm sick and tired of those who deem everything a "right". It's NOT a right. Each country has their own soverignty